Mani vs The District Collector
2021 Latest Caselaw 10685 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT

      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

 TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 9TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                   WP(C).No.15940 OF 2011(N)


PETITIONER:

              MANI
              S/O.KITTU,
              PALLAM,
              MUTHALAMADA VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK,
              PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

              BY ADVS.
              SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN
              SMT.P.G.BABITHA

RESPONDENTS:

      1       THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
              COLLECTORATE,
              PALAKKAD 678 001.

      2       THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
              PALAKKAD 678 001.

      3       THE VILLAGE OFFICER
              MUTHALAMADA VILLAGE,
              MUTHALAMADA.P.O.,
              CHITTUR TALUK 678 507.

      4       MUHAMMED BASHEER
              S/O.ISMAIL RAWTHER,
              PALLATH,
              MUTHALAMADA VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK,
              PALAKKAD DISTRICT 678 507.
 W.P.(C) No.15940/11              -:2:-




                 ADV.MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKEL, GOVT. PLEADER
                 ADV.VIJINA K.
                 SRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 30.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.15940/11                    -:3:-




                                  JUDGMENT

Dated this the 30th day of March, 2021

Petitioner seeks for a direction commanding respondents 2 and

3 to implement Ext.P4 decision expeditiously. Ext.P4 is an order

issued under Clause 7 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order directing

the 4th respondent to cultivate the land with paddy either personally

or through any other person within one month from the date of

service of the said order. The list of land scheduled in the order is

shown as Re-Survey Nos.361/5 and 361/6 of Block No.17 of

Muthalamada Village, Chittur Taluk, Palakkad District having an

extent of 0.6825 hectares.

2. I have heard Sri.Binoy Vasudevan, learned counsel for the

petitioner, Adv.Mathew George Vadakkel, learned Government

Pleader as well as Adv.Rajesh Sivaramankutty, learned counsel for

the 4th respondent.

3. Ext.P4 is an order directing the land specified therein to be

cultivated with paddy. It was noticed that the land was under paddy

cultivation earlier, but is under cultivation with other trees. Since

Ext.P4 has become final, it is liable to be implemented.

4. However, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the 4 th

respondent that Ext.P4 has been subjected to challenge before the

Land Revenue Commissioner by virtue of a revision petition filed on

26.7.2011 and according to the counsel the same is pending.

5. Though the learned counsel for the 4 th respondent could not

place before me any orders passed in the said revision petition,

without prejudice to the right of the 4 th respondent to pursue the said

revision petition if filed in accordance with law and still pending, this

writ petition is only to be allowed by directing respondents 2 and 3 to

implement Ext.P4 decision without further delay.

6. Since this matter is pending for the last 10 years, it is only

appropriate that the respondents 2 and 3 call upon the 4 th respondent

to carry out the directions already issued in Ext.P4 and ensure

compliance of Ext.P4. It is clarified that such a notice calling upon

the 4th respondent is only an indulgence being shown to the 4 th

respondent and will not be treated as a cause of action to revive a

stale claim over Ext.P4.

7. If the 4th respondent fails to comply with Ext.P4,

respondents 2 and 3 shall take appropriate action to cultivate the

lands involved in this case with paddy in accordance with law, as

provided under the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967. Needless to

state, if any orders are passed in the alleged revision filed on

26.7.2011, Ext.P4 shall be subject to that order.

The writ petition is allowed as above.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE vps

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX REGISTER

EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AND THE OTHER 5 NEARBY RESIDENTS BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT

EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT FORWARDED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER

EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 28.11.2008 IN FORM NO.E ISSUED UNDER CLAUSE 7 OF THE KERALA LAND UTILISATION ORDER, 1967

EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN O.S.

NO.354/2007 AND O.S. NO.49/2008 PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHITTUR DATED 24.3.2010

RESPONDENT'S/S' EXHIBITS:

NIL

TRUE COPY

VPS PS TO JUDGE